Abstract
The aim of this study is to establish an applicable methodology for the selection of a journal when aspiring to publish a scientific work in the biotechnology field, using the hierarchical analytical process. The publication of papers in indexed journals is one of the main goals of scientific research work. That’s why it is of great importance to select the journal that best disseminates the information of the paper among the technical-scientific community; however, having to rely on subjective criteria in the journal selection process can result in time and energy waste, unnecessary costs and a low dissemination of the researcher's scientific productivity. To establish the methodology, 11 qualitative and quantitative parameters of 20 scientific journals were evaluated, validated by a group of experts in the area, followed by a hierarchical analysis process, which established the selection criteria. It was found that the key elements to consider the journal selection are the impact factor, the acceptance time, the type of indexing and the number of articles published by the journal. Thus, with a methodology to choose the appropriate journal, it is possible to increase the possibilities of publishing the article, decrease the waiting time, publication costs and achieve a larger number of citations once published, using a variety of criteria and not just bibliometric criteria as the impact factor.
References
Al-Harbi, K. M. A.S. (2001). Application of the AHP in project management. International journal of project management, 19(1), 19-27.
American Psychological Association. (2015). Summary Report of Journal Operations, 2015 Statistics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000014
Babor, T. F., Stenius, K., Savva, S., y O’Reilly, J. (Eds.) (2008). Publishing addiction science: a guide for the perplexed (2a ed.). Reino Unido: International Society of Addiction Journal Editors.
Bhushan, N., y Rai, K. (2004) Applying the Analytical Hierarchy Process. Strategic Decision Making. Londres: Springer-Verlag.
Bodin, L., y Gass, S. I. (2004). Exercises for Teaching the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Informs Transactions on Education, 4(2), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/ited.4.2.1
Buela-Casal, G. (2003). Evaluación de la calidad de los artículos y de las revistas científicas: Propuesta del factor de impacto ponderado y de un índice de calidad. Psicothema, 15(1), 23-35.
Caballero-Uribe, C. V., Cuello, M., Lubo, A., Martínez, D., Marriaga, A., Ospino, F., y Palacio, S. (2006). El Factor de Impacto (FI) en la evaluación de las revistas biomédicas. Salud Uninorte, 22(2), 92-104.
Clarivate Analytics. (2017). It’s time to get the facts [The Web of Science Fact Book]. Recuperado de http://images.info.science.thomsonreuters.biz/Web/ThomsonReutersScience/%7bd6b7faae-3cc2-4186-8985-a6ecc8cce1ee%7d_Crv_WoS_Upsell_Factbook_A4_FA_LR_edits.pdf?_ga=2.196925422.35504895.1496703814-1860923406.1496164103
Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología. (2016). Criterios de ingreso o permanencia del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores (SNI). Recuperado de http://conacyt.gob.mx/index.php/sni/convocatorias-conacyt/convocatorias-sistema-nacional-de-investigadores-sni/marco-legal-sni/criterios-sni
Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología. (27 de enero de 2017). Reglamento del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores. Diario Oficial de la Federación, p. 105. Recuperado de http://www.conacyt.gob.mx/index.php/el-conacyt/sistema-nacional-de-investigadores/marco-legal/reglamento-sni/13493-reglamento-sni/file
Didou Aupetit, S., y Gérard, E. (2011). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores en 2009: ¿Un vector para la internacionalización de las élites científicas? Perfiles educativos, 33(132), 27-45.
Directory of Open Access. (2017). DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals [sitio web de inicio]. Recuperado de https://doaj.org/
Dunleavy, P. (2003). Authoring a PhD: How to plan, draft, write and finish a doctoral thesis or dissertation. Gran Bretaña: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ebsco Host. (2017). Academic Search Complete Magazines and Journals. Recuperado de https://www.ebscohost.com/titleLists/a9h-journals.htm
Elsevier. (2017). Content. Recuperado de https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content
Fundación Dialnet. (2017). Dialnet [sitio web de inicio]. Recuperado de https://dialnet.unirioja.es/
Garfield, E. (1999). Journal impact factor: a brief review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161(8), 979-980.
Larsen, P. O., y Von Ins, M. (2010). The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 84(3), 575-603.
Latindex. (2017). Latindex: Sistema Regional de Información en Línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal [sitio web de inicio]. Recuperado de http://www.latindex.org/latindex/inicio
Murugesan, R. (2014). How to target a journal that’s right for your research. Recuperado de http://www.scidev.net/global/publishing/practical-guide/target-journal-right-research-communicate-publish.html
Nancekivell, S. (2004). Writing a publishable journal article: A Perspective from the other side of the desk. Recuperado de http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2004_04_16/nodoi.6272892291901906334
Neill, U. S. (2007). How to write a scientific masterpiece. The Journal of clinical investigation, 117(12), 3599-3602.
Ramanathan, R., y Ganesh, L. (1994). Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages. European Journal of Operational Research, 79(2), 249-265.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. Nueva York: McGraw-Hill.
Saaty, T. L. (2001). Fundamentals of the Analytical Hierarchy Process. En D. L. Schmoldt, J. Kangas, G. A. Mendoza y M. Pesonen (Eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process in natural resource and Environmental Decision Making (Vol. 3, pp. 15-35). Países Bajos: Springer.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process, International Journal Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98.
Sanz-Valero, J., Wanden-Berghe, C., y Castiel, L. D. (2007). Documentación y corrección: la carta de presentación, algo más que simple protocolo. Nutrición Hospitalaria, 22(1), 4-6.
Schimel, J. (2012). Writing science: how to write papers that get cited and proposals that get funded. Estados Unidos: Oxfort University Press.
SciELO. (2017). SciELO: Scientific Electronic Library [sitio web de inicio]. Recuperado de http://scielo.org/php/index.php
Sistema de Información Científica Redalyc. (2017). Redalyc: Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina y el Caribe, España y Portugal [sitio web de inicio]. Recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org
Testa, J. (2009). The Thomson Reuters journal selection process. Transnational Corporations Review, 1(4), 59-66.
Torres-Salinas, D., y Cabezas-Clavijo, Á. (2013). Cómo publicar en revistas científicas de impacto: consejos y reglas sobre publicación científica. EC3 Metrics Spin-Off, 13, 1-15.
U.S. National Library of Medicine. (2016). FAQ: Journal Selection for MEDLINE® Indexing at NLM. Recuperado de https://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/j_sel_faq.html
U.S. National Library of Medicine. (2017). Number of Titles Currently Indexed for Index Medicus® and MEDLINE® on PubMed®. Recuperado de https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/num_titles.html
Ulrich’s WebTM. (2017). Frequently Asked Questions (Faqs). Recuperado de http://www.ulrichsweb.com/ulrichsweb/faqs.asp
Web of Knowledge. (2016). The Thomson Reuters Journal Selection Process. Recuperado de http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/